3 thoughts on “Contact

  1. Hello guys, I am writin from Bogotá-Colombia, from the Anarchist Group Bifurcation (G.A.B) and the anarchist Black Cross(A.B.C), our organization want to know the healthy status of the partner Jock, we started to disseminate information in Colombia in search for support, soon expect a letter from Colombia, greetings guys, FREEDOM IS ACTION

  2. Hello Jock, i want to help you , so i do some research for you about the case, and i hope soon we’ll have a success, you have my support btw! Respect from Moscow!

    With love /S.R./

  3. I write openly today to appeal to a great nations conscience. As a British man who now lives in Bulgaria and within the borders of our new European Union friend and neighbour. I also write as a British man in regard to my former home lands Common Wealth member, Australia. My position is one of complete neutrality and one where I have nothing to personally gain from these words, I write only as a humble human being, an ‘earthling’ with a concern for all humankind. From a position of compassion, humanity and objective understanding.
    The case of 21 year old Jock Palreeman concerns me deeply. The young 21 year old Australian citizen whom In the early hours of 28 December 2007 went out with a couple of friends to enjoy an evening in Sofia – an evening that ended in tragedy. For Bulgaria awoke to the news of the fatal wounding and killing of Bulgarian student Andrei Monov. Himself also a young man with a very promising future, a world ahead of him and a human life tragically taken far too soon. Grief is an unbearable emotion, a loss of which any parent will never recover. The pain does not ease for anyone involved and life becomes empty. I express my deepest and most sincere condolences to the family and friends of Andrei, themselves now left behind to deal with their great loss. I also recognise that Antoan Zahariev was also seriously injured.
    You may feel that my following criticism of the Bulgarian judicial system is derived of some sense of ignorance or from a belief that British justice is somehow infallible – this is certainly not the case. So allow me first to speak of one of the most significant cases of British miscarriage of justice, a case referred to by British Members of Parliament as ‘ the worst case of miscarriage of justice ever experienced by our nation.’ 23 year old Stefan Kiszko was charged with the brutal murder of Lesley Molseed, a girl of just 11 years of age. She was viciously stabbed to death, her body dumped on moor land – the killer having masturbated over her. At the time four teenage girls claimed that Kiszko had indecently exposed himself to them the day before the murder. One of them also said he had exposed himself to her a month after the murder. West Yorkshire Police quickly formed the view that Kiszko fitted the profile of the man likely to have killed Lesley, though he had never been in trouble with the police before. He had no social life beyond his mother and aunt, he was a loner and a man with learning diifculites, a young man quite unable to socially represent himself.
    Prior to the British Police and Criminal Evidence Act of 1984, suspects did not have the right to legal representation during interviews and the police did not provide a solicitor to Kiszko. His request to have his mother present whilst he was being questioned were refused. After three days of intensive pressure and questioning Kiszko broke down and admitted to the offence, he was charged with Lesley’s Molseed’s cold-blooded murder. His conviction was later secured by Jury, a 10-2 majority verdict on 21 July 1976. He was given a life sentence. The judge praised the girls ‘exposure statements’ and to one in particular for “bravery and honesty.” He also praised the police officers ” for their great skill in bringing to justice the person responsible for this dreadful crime and their expertise in sifting through masses of material” adding, “I would like all the officers responsible for the result to be specially commended.” Our nation was so shocked by this heinous unforgivable crime that the public hanging of Kiszko was demanded. After just one month in the notorious Armley prison of Leeds, Kiszko was transferred and immediately placed on Rule 43 to protect him. Following his conviction he was bitterly detested by prison inmates, receiving taunts and several death threats. He was physically attacked and seriously beaten and hospitalised four times during the first four and a half years of his sentence.
    For eight years Kiszko’s mother desperately fought to prove his innocence but she was ignored by all politicians, these including Prime Ministers Callaghan (1976 to 1979) and Thatcher (from 1979), and further completely stone-walled by the British legal system. In 1984 she contacted a voluntary organisation (JUSTICE), a UK based human rights group which investigates numerous miscarriages of British justice. Three years later solicitor Campbell Malone agreed to take a look at the case. It seemed almost certain that Kiszko would never be released but In February 1991 Malone, and with the help of a private detective (Peter Jackson) finally urged the Home Office to re-open the case. Detective Superintendent Trevor Wilkinson was assigned and immediately found several glaring errors. Kiszko’s innocence was demonstrated conclusively through medical evidence; Kiszko was infertile, contradicting forensic evidence obtained at the time of the murder. This was crucial evidence that eliminated him from DNA sample taken at the scene of the murder. Evidence that the police had deliberately held back from the trial.
    Also in February 1991 the four girls involved in the original court trial admitted that the evidence they had given leading to Kiszko’s conviction was totally false and without foundation. Although he had been told in 1983 that he would only be eligible for parole if he admitted to the murder – the Home Office now changed its view. In February 1990, Kiszko’s first parole hearing was scheduled to take place during 1992, his 17th year in prison for a crime he had clearly not committed. In August 1991 new findings in Kiszko’s case supplied by his voluntary legal team were referred again to the Home Secretary, Kenneth Baker. Baker immediately passed them on to the Court of Appeal. Despite the overwhelming and obvious evidence that Kiszko was innocent he had by now spent 16 years of his life in prison. He died of a massive heart attack just one year after his release, he was 41 years old. His ill and frailing mother also died 6 months later. After his death and in November 2006, it was announced that another man, a 53-year-old named Ronald Castree had been arrested in connection with the murder. DNA had shown a “direct hit” with the sample originally found at the murder scene.
    So how does this relate to the case of Jock Palreeman and the brutal killing of Andrei Monov which concerns me so deeply? Well I now read extensively and recently of this case and draw several similar and uncomfortable parallels. Am I saying that Palfreeman is innocent? Of-course not – for how can I express such an opinion when i was not there that evening to witness such horrific events. But am I expressing a sense that his conviction for the murder of Andrei is correct? I cannot say this either for what I read before me objectively as evidence and including the transcripts of his trial suggest that his conviction is certainly, as in the case of Stefan Kiszko, an un-safe one. I read that following this incident only Palfreeman was searched, his knife which he admitted to carrying and owning presented as evidence in court against him. A knife absent of his finger prints, a knife with the blood of Andrei Monov upon it but absent of the blood of the other victim, Antoan Zahariev. A case where crucial CCTV evidence is found to be destroyed and where three police officers who originally stated in writing that Palfreeman had come to the aid of two Roma boys whom were being attacked, later change their statements in court – this as so many others involved also did. A conviction for murder secured on the evidence of a pathologist who himself was later struck-off for illegal practice and professional misconduct. And of a Prosecutor herself charged with interfering in the arrest of her partner, a man linked to organised crime. And crucially a trial that ignores its own professional forensic adviser whom categorically states that the fatal wound to the victim was caused by a double edged knife – not the knife owned and carried by Palfreeman. Further the testimony of an Australian newspaper article referred to several times during the trial in regard to a previous knife incident linked to Palfreeman – an incident that the Australian Police confirm did not happen. Palfreeman’s trial held in the absence of key witnesses in his defence whom simply ‘failed to turn up’ and give evidence.
    It is not my intention to cause offence, to somehow minimise the seriousness of these tragic sets of events. If Palfreeman is guilty then he must serve his time – but I write to ask of you that now, given the passage of time and the birth of a new free-er and more democratically accountable nation this year that we all look objectively and closely at the facts of this conviction. The clocks cannot be turned back and the grief of those whom have suffered so greatly cannot ever be undone. Maybe it is now the appropriate time to consent with the requests of the Australian government and release Palreeman to them to serve the remainder of his sentence at home in Austrailia. A request that has for the last 12 months been ignored by the Bulgarian Government. Can we as human beings acknowledge that Jock Palfreeman also has a father who has lost his son, a father now in frail health who too hurts deeply at his loss. Can we consider that Palfreeman’s intentions to help others that night where honest and genuine, that he is not perhaps the cold blooded murderer the media presented? That during this ‘drunken affray’ where he was confronted by a group of 20 males he stepped in to help others and that good intention then led to appalling tragedy. We will now never know what really or exactly happened that fateful evening?
    I am aware that some of you may be offended by my words, I am also aware that some political groups will seek to make personally gain from this letter, I ask you to please see through this. I ask you only to consider, that just as in the case of Kiszko in the UK, where a whole nation deeply grieves and where pre-trial guilt is already assumed by the media and trial Judge – that is it possible that mistakes have been made. And if so can we correct them?
    I reiterate my condolences to the family of Andrei Monov, Jonathan Taylor

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s